Fireproof:Meh, not that ridiculous. There was one food drop throughout the entire series, and, IIRC, it was before the Flame was destroyed. The idea of them making one more after its destruction isn't that crazy, anyway. The whole thing was automated partly via the Lamp Post (which was still being manned by the Others) except for the two warehouse workers in Guam who were kept in the dark about everything.

There were was one food drop post crash (and at least one when Desmond was manning the hatch that was shown). Then the Flame was blown up. Food drops were ordered from the Flame. Yet, there is a warehouse that is setting up a food drop that was requested 3 years after the destruction of the Flame. Ben's knowledge of the warehouse (and the ability of the warehouse to send a drone with food to the island) goes against the need and stated purpose of the Lamp Post. Also the need for the O6 to take Ajira to find the island doesn't mesh with the fact that Widmore could just send a sub (unless one of Widmore's people on Ajira set up a beacon and I don't remember that being addressed, but it might have been.)

I loved four seasons of LOST. Thought one season was silly, and thought one season was bad. There are many good things about the show, but there are many either unresolved things or things that had explanations that are inconsistent with what was show previously.

elvindeath:Article completely fails. Without question, this is number one:

[media.avclub.com image 627x325]

But how do you "resolve" that story without it being completely cheesy? The Russian guy stumbles into the Bing and opens fire?

I do think they should have dealt with the repercussions of that guy being killed or going missing, though. I mean, there is a scene in that episode where the boss of the Russian mob makes it clear to Tony that this guy is very special to him and he would take any harm that came to him personally. And you probably don't want to piss off the Russian mob.

I think for TNG, though the whole "conspiracy" arc was a good choice, I'd have gone with the Warp Factor Speed Limit plot line they set up but just dropped. So what happens is some alien dude and his biatchy sister manage to prove that going over Warp Factor 4 or something like that farks up the universe. So Starfleet actually imposes a speed limit on starships. They even mentioned it after that episode, in that at least once Picard says they have authorization to exceed warp factor limits. But then they realized how stupid that is, and Picard's calling for Maximum Warp just so he can get to the nearest starbase to get some more Earl Gray tea.

What's creepier, Belding following Zack across the country to continue teaching him or Mr. Feeny somehow teaching Corey from Boy Meets World from grade school to college and somehow shadowing him his entire life, albeit in the same town they where neighbors in?

I say Mr. Belding. Corey would periodically mention how it's funny that Mr. Feeny was always around and then before graduation discovered a secret hallway where all the disappeared characters lived.

If you like to read expanded Star Trek universe stuff, the whole parasite thing was fleshed out fully in the "8th Season" of DS9 that started with the "Avatar" 2-parter, and brought to a close, I think, with the book "Unity."

CZMisfitsFan://And I can tell you probably just watched about a season and a half worth of the show, decided it required too much thinking, and picked up tidbits about what happened from other sources.

"Too much thinking" Wowee wow. I watched the whole series, and if you're trying to suggest that Lost didn't have giant Island-sized holes and a million dropped storylines, then...I dunno, man. That's really something. I mean, really. I gotta believe you're a Tea Party local president, amirite?

im disappointed they didnt make this idea into a movie, let alone further tv episodes.

one rumour i heard was that this race was originally what the writers conceived to be what eventually became the borg. if so, i guess it can be forgiven, the borg were pretty cool.

For what it's worth, in the books following the end of DS9 they pick the idea back up and it's actually an even bigger conspiracy than originally thought, as the parasites originated with a Federation species that kept it concealed

somemoron:Speaking of dropped plots... remember the cartoon Rocky & Bullwinkle? Remember how at the end of every show they would tell you to tune in next week for (wild plot synopsis)?

NEVER ONCE DID THEY COME THROUGH! NOT ONCE! AAARGGGGHHHHH!!!!

\I thought TV was showing all the episodes out of order and was all mad, because the (plot synopsis) sounded so much cooler than the show I just watched.

Battlestar Galactica did the same thing in reverse. On their 'Previously, on Battlestar Galactica' they would show scenes that never made the final aired cut. When I was watching it week-by-week on TV, this made me think I had missed episodes somehow, or at least had some sort of blackout/time loss during the last episode.

When I watched them all in a row on DVD, I realised that no, they were just fracking with me.

somemoron:I thought that Conspiracy was a good arc for the first season. The Bord definitely replaced it what with the "They're coming!" bit, but I would have liked to see that arc continued, even if it was much later.

I read somewhere that originally the Starfleet Conspiracy wasn't due to an infestation ofalien thingies but a real conspiracy of Starfleet officers, but that when Gene Roddenberryread the script he declared that in the 24th century humans wouldn't do that sort ofthing any more, so they patched it up with the alien infestation.

DjangoStonereaver:somemoron: I thought that Conspiracy was a good arc for the first season. The Bord definitely replaced it what with the "They're coming!" bit, but I would have liked to see that arc continued, even if it was much later.

I read somewhere that originally the Starfleet Conspiracy wasn't due to an infestation ofalien thingies but a real conspiracy of Starfleet officers, but that when Gene Roddenberryread the script he declared that in the 24th century humans wouldn't do that sort ofthing any more, so they patched it up with the alien infestation.

Probably.

I'd wager that most of the crap in the first two seasons was mostly Roddenberry's doing.

His franchise had outgrown him. He wanted this PC pacifist bullshiat future, when the big money was being made over in the Trek movies, which were naval battles in space.

However, the guys who got TNG after him (Berman and Piller, IIRC), and the DS9 crew showed what Trek could be without someone who was buying into his own hype as the "Great Bird of the Galaxy" running the show.

/We'll not speak of how Berman buying into his own hype ruined Trek for generations to come.

still 1 episode left this season, might show up again. I'm still shocked Jason didn't turn. I think Jason as a vampire would be awesome, so I hope Jessica turns him.

/they need to do a better job of showing how much stronger Eric is compared to Bill. Last season you could tell Russell was superior to everyone.//I have no idea what the cliff hanger is going to be this season, maybe they show Jason starting to turn finally?

-The temporal cold war on that crapfest "Enterprise," which was a main plot until the Xindi were manufactured to try and get viewers... then they didn't even say who the shadowy guy was;

- On Heroes, super nice-guy Peter leaving his Irish GF in a hellish alternate future and not even mentioning her again (I know, the writer's strike was the reason for dropping the plots planned for the unmade second part of the season, but really... they could have at least mentioned her...);

- Chuck Cunningham on Happy Days (Richie and Joanie's lost brother from the first season; after that they always said it was a 2-kid family);

elvindeath:Article completely fails. Without question, this is number one:

[media.avclub.com image 627x325]

People often don't believe me, but that was actually the one and only episode of the Sopranos I ever watched, and I saw it the night it aired. And here I always hear about how it was one of the best ones they did. It was okay, but I never got into it enough to watch another one...

NJP2007:Ignores one of the biggest dropped subplots - Richie's "older" brother on "Happy Days." And there's a similar story, apocryphal I think, about one of the daytime soaps circa late 50's or early '60's wherein a peripheral character excuses him or herself to go upstairs to bed - and never comes down. Years later, the head writer gets a letter from a confused viewer wondered just when said sleeping character will be making a reappearance.

I don't know if we're thinking of the same thing but I remember something similar in the mid-70s. I used to watch All My Children and one day, a 12-yo Tad Martin went upstairs to polish his skis. He was never heard from again for something like 10 years, when Michael Knight showed up as full-grown Tad. I think he's now a central character on the show.

brigid_fitch:I don't know if we're thinking of the same thing but I remember something similar in the mid-70s. I used to watch All My Children and one day, a 12-yo Tad Martin went upstairs to polish his skis. He was never heard from again for something like 10 years, when Michael Knight showed up as full-grown Tad. I think he's now a central character on the show.

Depending on how old you are this is probably not the right one. Tad (as portrayed by the current actor) started on the show in 1982. He had appeared as a child earlier, but that was in the 70's I believe.

You want to hear something funny? David Hasselhoff's wife left him for...Michael Knight. True story.

Ex Parte Gilligan:DamnYankees: The West Wing - Sam loses. This is made pretty obvious. He leaves the White House knowing he will lose and presumably does. What more is there to say?

Yeah, I was gonna say... They had that scene in the bar with Sam and Toby, where the latter tells the former, it's over and Toby didn't want Sam to just twist in the wind alone. The entire show made it pretty clear you're either in or you're out, and if you lose an election you're just gone. That's one thing I liked about the Sorkin Years: A distinct lack of sentimentality when it came to winners and losers.

I agree that it is crystal clear that Sam loses. My problem was always with the fact that he was never really mentioned again until the last season after being such an integral part of the administration. Bartlett had said that Sam would one day run for President, Sam left to run in Orange County knowing he would lose and the leave of absence was only supposed to be temporary and Sam was going to come back as a Senior Counselor to the President.

While I understand that Sam could easily pass on the senior counselor and want to take a break from politics (to earn a salary as an attorney that would make Josh puke), his "contact" with the staff following his departure was so infrequent to the point of unbelievability. Toby trusted almost nobody but he trusted Sam, Josh was his best friend, he referred to Donna as one of his best friends, Sam and CJ were extremely close, etc. It was unbelievable that he wouldn't have more contact with the staff (other than the once a season reference they made to him in seasons 5 and 6) on either a professional or personal level even if it was off-screen.

The Deadwood one on the list doesn't even make much sense. Two characters show up in the Camp, have a little adventure and then leave and people say goodbye to them. How exactly is that unresolved? Especially when the show was cancelled at the end of the season.

As far as Lost goes, I don't even really mind the fact that so much of it went unresolved, since way more about the island was explained to me the viewer, then was explained to the Losties who made it off the island at the end of the final episode. I can totally picture Sawyer sitting on the plane and just cleaning out the bar and trying to figure out what the hell happened to him those past few years.

mjbok:brigid_fitch: I don't know if we're thinking of the same thing but I remember something similar in the mid-70s. I used to watch All My Children and one day, a 12-yo Tad Martin went upstairs to polish his skis. He was never heard from again for something like 10 years, when Michael Knight showed up as full-grown Tad. I think he's now a central character on the show.

Depending on how old you are this is probably not the right one. Tad (as portrayed by the current actor) started on the show in 1982. He had appeared as a child earlier, but that was in the 70's I believe.

You want to hear something funny? David Hasselhoff's wife left him for...Michael Knight. True story.

That's exactly what I mean. I watched the kid go upstairs to polish his skis in the mid-70s & he was never even referred to again for almost a decade until Michael Knight showed up. The character just dropped off the face of the planet until the early 80s and we were all like, "Damn, those skis must be REALLY shiny!"

What about them? They're in Hot Shot being led by Crystal. They'll probably show up again next year when none of the babies change during the full moon.

Now, if you'd asked about the fairies, that would make more sense. They show up halfway through last season, turn all evil this season, Eric eats Claudia, and...? What about the rest of stupid fairyland, why did Claudia come back & command Sookie to go with her? What's with the cryptic, "He'll take your light" from last season? THAT'S a dropped plotline. If they drop it for good, they'll be doing us a favor. Unless they do the full-blown fairy war from the 9th book, there's no reason for it.

/It's a shame what they did w/the Hot Shot storyline from the books. Harris actually had some really nice characters in there & a decent plot.//Well, except for turning Jason into a werepanther. That was just stupid.

... Walt was mostly useful to the Others because they needed children to replenish their population due to the pregnancy issue....No, they could (and were) leaving the island any time they wanted. If they wanted 'new blood' they could recruit / procreate off-island and bring them back.

That would probably be an option if the wanted (like they brought Juliet), but they probably prefer children so they can raise them as they choose. There's a big difference between recruiting people off-island to voluntarily come and kidnapping children off-island.

I'd like to add the robot ninjas from Angel. I'm sure this got dropped because the show ended, but that was just random and needed further exploring to make any sense.

Also on Voyager, whatever happened to the Equinox crew they picked up?

What bothers me more are changed plot lines that create continuity errors.

Like on Roseanne, when she got pregnant, they said she was going to have a baby girl and there was an episode about how it might turn out retarded or disabled because she was on the old side for having a baby. Then she had the baby and it was a healthy boy.

Or on Full House how Uncle Jesse's last name was originall Cockran or something and then they changed it to Contapoulus. I'm not sure what the point of that was.

Yah I used to watch a lot of Nick at Night.

Or on Voyager in the episode Before and After Kes warns Janeway about the Kremin and how they're going to almost destroy Voyager and how Janeway must avoid them at all costs. Then when Janeway encounters the Kremin in Year of Hell it's like she's never heard of them before. I guess with ST you can always justify these things with alternative timelines/realities, but that has always bothered me.

For some reason I'm at a loss to thinking of other ones other than stray family members that disappear or get replaced on sitcoms, but those are so well known they're not worth mentioning.

mechgreg:The Deadwood one on the list doesn't even make much sense. Two characters show up in the Camp, have a little adventure and then leave and people say goodbye to them. How exactly is that unresolved? Especially when the show was cancelled at the end of the season.

Not to mention the show is 1) based on a book and 2) based vaguely on what real people did. As per the book, the Earps stay in Deadwood was very brief, and in reality it might not have even been that. This is like complaining that they killed Wild Bill too early.

I've always wondered why the King of the Hill subplot about Peggy trying to get pregnant was dropped rather unceremoniously. I know it had something to do with the episode where she falls out of the plane, though it seemed like an odd excuse to drop the plot.

eddiesocket:I'll just leave this here. Let me guess, Lost apologists: All those questions were answered and we're just too dumb to "get it". Link (new window)

Some of those were legit, but a lot were either answered or not important. For instance: "Who was Libby's husband that gave her a boat?" Who cares? She had a dead husband that left her a boat. Desmond needed a boat. That's all that was important. Or for an answered one: "Why did Horace lead Locke to the cabin to find Jacob?" The MiB was manipulating Locke throughout the series. It makes sense that he would send Locke somewhere to have a face-to-face with him. If Locke is convinced that he's talking to Jacob, and more importantly that it was he that decided to seek Jacob out, then Locke would be easier to manipulate.

I'll never try to insist that Lost is a perfect show when it comes to wrapping things up, but considering that it was a seven season show that had to deal with a a network, a pool of writers, and the whims of the cast, I think they did an amazing job with it. There are a few things I would have liked it to do differently, but I'm happy with what we ended up with. I'm currently rewatching the show for the first time since the finale (just finished season 3), and I think it holds together quite well overall.

NeoCortex42:Or for an answered one: "Why did Horace lead Locke to the cabin to find Jacob?" The MiB was manipulating Locke throughout the series. It makes sense that he would send Locke somewhere to have a face-to-face with him. If Locke is convinced that he's talking to Jacob, and more importantly that it was he that decided to seek Jacob out, then Locke would be easier to manipulate.

I agree with your assessment that some of it was answered, and some of it was unimportant, but the example quoted above actually has a few questions about it. Why was Horace (MIB) in a temporal loop? Also, why did he start bleeding? The bleeding one (based on later events with being unstuck in time) actually leads to one of my biggest pet peeves about LOST: there were so many red-herrings and misdirections that served no purpose.

NeoCortex42:I'm currently rewatching the show for the first time since the finale (just finished season 3), and I think it holds together quite well overall.

I've been doing this also, but the thing that has bothered me is the inconsistencies that creep up knowing the total picture.

mjbok:NeoCortex42: Or for an answered one: "Why did Horace lead Locke to the cabin to find Jacob?" The MiB was manipulating Locke throughout the series. It makes sense that he would send Locke somewhere to have a face-to-face with him. If Locke is convinced that he's talking to Jacob, and more importantly that it was he that decided to seek Jacob out, then Locke would be easier to manipulate.

I agree with your assessment that some of it was answered, and some of it was unimportant, but the example quoted above actually has a few questions about it. Why was Horace (MIB) in a temporal loop? Also, why did he start bleeding? The bleeding one (based on later events with being unstuck in time) actually leads to one of my biggest pet peeves about LOST: there were so many red-herrings and misdirections that served no purpose.

NeoCortex42: I'm currently rewatching the show for the first time since the finale (just finished season 3), and I think it holds together quite well overall.

I've been doing this also, but the thing that has bothered me is the inconsistencies that creep up knowing the total picture.

Of all the holes and inconsistencies, the fact that Jack, Kate, and Hurley went back in time while Sun, Ben, and the rest did not and this was never explained or even questioned pissed me off the most.

Ex Parte Gilligan: DamnYankees: The West Wing - Sam loses. This is made pretty obvious. He leaves the White House knowing he will lose and presumably does. What more is there to say?

Yeah, I was gonna say... They had that scene in the bar with Sam and Toby, where the latter tells the former, it's over and Toby didn't want Sam to just twist in the wind alone. The entire show made it pretty clear you're either in or you're out, and if you lose an election you're just gone. That's one thing I liked about the Sorkin Years: A distinct lack of sentimentality when it came to winners and losers.

I agree that it is crystal clear that Sam loses. My problem was always with the fact that he was never really mentioned again until the last season after being such an integral part of the administration. Bartlett had said that Sam would one day run for President, Sam left to run in Orange County knowing he would lose and the leave of absence was only supposed to be temporary and Sam was going to come back as a Senior Counselor to the President.

While I understand that Sam could easily pass on the senior counselor and want to take a break from politics (to earn a salary as an attorney that would make Josh puke), his "contact" with the staff following his departure was so infrequent to the point of unbelievability. Toby trusted almost nobody but he trusted Sam, Josh was his best friend, he referred to Donna as one of his best friends, Sam and CJ were extremely close, etc. It was unbelievable that he wouldn't have more contact with the staff (other than the once a season reference they made to him in seasons 5 and 6) on either a professional or personal level even if it was off-screen.

I seem to remember President Bartlett saying something along the lines of making Sam Attorney General after he loses the election, as Will Bailey was now the Deputy Communications Director

eddiesocket:mjbok: NeoCortex42: Or for an answered one: "Why did Horace lead Locke to the cabin to find Jacob?" The MiB was manipulating Locke throughout the series. It makes sense that he would send Locke somewhere to have a face-to-face with him. If Locke is convinced that he's talking to Jacob, and more importantly that it was he that decided to seek Jacob out, then Locke would be easier to manipulate.

I agree with your assessment that some of it was answered, and some of it was unimportant, but the example quoted above actually has a few questions about it. Why was Horace (MIB) in a temporal loop? Also, why did he start bleeding? The bleeding one (based on later events with being unstuck in time) actually leads to one of my biggest pet peeves about LOST: there were so many red-herrings and misdirections that served no purpose.

NeoCortex42: I'm currently rewatching the show for the first time since the finale (just finished season 3), and I think it holds together quite well overall.

I've been doing this also, but the thing that has bothered me is the inconsistencies that creep up knowing the total picture.

Of all the holes and inconsistencies, the fact that Jack, Kate, and Hurley went back in time while Sun, Ben, and the rest did not and this was never explained or even questioned pissed me off the most.

For the Horace thing, I can't remember the circumstances exactly. It could have just been MiB screwing with Locke with a dream/vision. Also a bit of plot foreshadowing for the viewer.

I'll agree with the problem about some going back in time and others not. I figured it worked the same as how Sawyer's group went back when the wheel was turned while the Others did not. There was never any explanation given, which is annoying, but I guess I can let it go with "only the people that needed to go back went back." It's a bit of a lame explanation, but it kind of works on the level that Jacob might have some control/influence over fate. Maybe he was able to control who traveled. I'll admit that it was one "question" that I kind of had to ignore in the end.

The one that bugs me the most, and will probably annoy me the most when I get the that point of the rewatch, is the outrigger chase. I'm really ticked that we didn't get the payoff of seeing the other side of the chase. I thought it would have been great to kill off one of the Losties by having them get shot by the time-traveling group. It wouldn't have been that hard to set up, but Damon & Carlton pretty much abandoned it.

NeoCortex42:For the Horace thing, I can't remember the circumstances exactly. It could have just been MiB screwing with Locke with a dream/vision. Also a bit of plot foreshadowing for the viewer.

Horace is basically in a loop saying the same thing and (I think) chopping down the same tree. He says something about John talking to someone who has been dead for 30 years (don't remember the number of years) and he has a nose bleed. It's safe to say it's smokey, but why would he direct John to the cabin? Also the nose bleed is a red herring when paired with the unstuck in time nonsense.